Does this make sense to anyone? (The Definition of Masculinty)

Pages

I guess I really started thinking about this with that God-awful Dr Pepper commercial, where they try to tell you their new drink is for men and NOT for women. It's the same damn diet dr pepper in a different can you assholes!
Anyways, you see it a lot with Dove shampoo commercials and all over the place, even outside of commercials, people trying to define what being a man Is.
And it pisses me off, and now thanks to some shitty artwork, I think I've figured out why.

If you think of a white sheet of paper, and you know, with absolute certainty, that the definition of manhood is on it. Okay fine, whatever, right? It's in there somewhere, that's good enough to know.

But then if you mark off a part that you have decided is most assuredly not part of masculinity, like so:

Then decide some other piece is not masculine, and separate that:

And just keep marking off piece after piece, until you're left with only and exactly what defines manhood.

That once you've honed it down, to it's precise space, that it no longer has any value at all.

And that's why I don't like seeing those commercials or anything that tries to define being a man.

Anyways, does any of this explanation make sense to anyone, or can you shoot holes in it? I need to know now before I submit it in my attempt at a doctorate.

A long email about masculinity? You getting laid can't have anything to do with that.... What kind of girls do you attract?!

No, no, no, we were in 11th grade, and I was like, "What does it mean to be a man?! Society be too crazy and convoluted to define a gender role for me!" It was part of a series of discussions we'd had. She sexed me with the implication "this is all you need to know."

I don't wanna make any judgments or assumptions about people, but she sounds like one of those girls that your email could have just been the one sentence ""What does it mean to be a man?!" and she would have jumped on you.

I've always had an issue with labels, especially gender roles. It's strange to think I grew up in a conservative, religious, macho dominated culture yet none of the labels stopped me from doing what I wanted to do just because I was or girl or young or too small. I was gonna find a way to do things that most didn't expect me or think I could do. Part of that attitude was my independence and another part was due to my father's encouragement, support, and most times just treating me as an equal instead of as a kid and a young girl at that.

The first sport I ever learned(this story probably belongs in the childhood thread but I'll put it here) was baseball or catch. My dad geared me up in a Dodger glove and cap, took me to the backyard and started launching balls almost directly at my head so I would have to catch it. Most dad's I see starting out playing catch with their sons will most likely lob the ball, not my dad! Overhand throw to a five year old little tiny me. If it wasn't for my dad's confidence in me with stuff like that I'd most likely be a super insecure lady not sure of my own capability in being able to do anything!

I don't think gender roles are pink and blue, and it really bothers me that is very much the truth for most people. It bothers me that boys are not allowed to play with dolls because of their parents insecurities of what that might suggest about their son or girls being to rough while playing because it's not ladylike.

I can't stand it when people try to talk about what is for girls and what is for boys. I see it a lot with parents telling their children that something or other is for the opposite sex, so they shouldn't play with it, etc. It annoys the fuck out of me. I think because there are a number of things in my personality that are definitely not traditionally masculine, but I don't care, because these make me who I am, and if people don't like it, then that's not my problem.

My kids are gonna do awesome things. Not lame things. Not to generalize, but most of the things typically reserved for little girls are lame. Tea parties? C'mooon. My daughter's gonna be in judo!

Well I do see that little girls are being given more freedoms to delve into a "Man's World" but like Fano said there are certain characteristic traits being denied to males while girls/women are being empowered with career titles/fighting careers etc. I really loved patton oswald's article on the recent Dolphin's locker room bullying. It shed some light from a male perspective on how men are expected to be tough, warrior like, and take what ever shit is thrown your way without succumbing to it. It was rather refreshing to read.

I dont even know what 'being a man' is anymore. I despise magazine like Maxim or when guys go ' I have to have a man cave'. What the fuck does that even mean? You got an extra room in the house and your spouse 'let' you put a TV and a poster in it?
I think 'being a man' or the old concept of it is gone. Now its marketers and magazines telling you what being a man is.

I never thought much about specific toys being for girls and others for boys, but I've gotten really aware of that and now it bothers me to no end. My sister is pregnant with 2 girls, I want to give them cars and dinosaurs to play with.

I feel like a man most of the time. I don't have to flex or anything. Or be told how i'm supposed to act. Maybe ten years ago i needed to be told but not now. Also, it bugs me when people say "be a man". What does that even mean? How? What's "being a man"? Especially when a girl says it. She's just saying "be an antiquated concept of what i think a man should be, based on a fictional man i liked once."

I never thought much about specific toys being for girls and others for boys, but I've gotten really aware of that and now it bothers me to no end. My sister is pregnant with 2 girls, I want to give them cars and dinosaurs to play with.

Yeah, this really angers me. As a kid, lots of adults made me feel like a weirdo for playing with boys and not liking Barbies. Things weren't even that bad then, either!

Even toys which were originally gender neutral now seem to be gender segregated. I liked this advert from the 80s for Lego that got circulated on Facebook a few months ago:
But it's a shame that they are now just as bad as the other toy companies!

I could put this in the Unpopular Opinion thread, but I just don't get Legos. For boys or girls.
I mean, maybe if you had a million pieces and you literally could build anything you could imagine, but what the heck good is a box of 50 of them going to do?
Even if you save them up from all the birthdays and Christmases, what do you have then? 200-300 of them? "Oooo look, I built a really small square house with a tiny chimney." bah!

I think 'being a man' or the old concept of it is gone. Now its marketers and magazines telling you what being a man is.

That's part of the problem. Men are obsolete. There's no hunting. No head of household. Not even any rites of passage. How is it possible to be a guy nowadays and not feel like you're completely irrelevant?

I could put this in the Unpopular Opinion thread, but I just don't get Legos. For boys or girls.
I mean, maybe if you had a million pieces and you literally could build anything you could imagine, but what the heck good is a box of 50 of them going to do?
Even if you save them up from all the birthdays and Christmases, what do you have then? 200-300 of them? "Oooo look, I built a really small square house with a tiny chimney." bah!

This very much sounds like what a person who was deprived of Lego would say.

I could put this in the Unpopular Opinion thread, but I just don't get Legos. For boys or girls.
I mean, maybe if you had a million pieces and you literally could build anything you could imagine, but what the heck good is a box of 50 of them going to do?
Even if you save them up from all the birthdays and Christmases, what do you have then? 200-300 of them? "Oooo look, I built a really small square house with a tiny chimney." bah!

I put Legos on my Christmas list every single year, and received none every single year. To top it off, all my friends had huge Lego sets.
On topic, I'm pretty sure they come in larger sets than that and are fairly inexpensive. Well, in comparison to, say, a bicycle.

Legos are awesome. Well at least they were when I would get a set and imagine all the cool things I would build. Alas, my ADD would usually prevent me from doing more than making a really bad airplane or just a really big wall for my other action figures to scale..But in theory they are awesome.

I'm pretty ambivalent on the gender roles though. I don't feel any great desire to hunt mastodon to prove my masculinity. We seem to have gotten to a point that you can sort of choose what all of that means to you, regardless of gender. I think it's certainly easier for girls/women to do, as there is still maybe more judgement of guys with feminine interests.

Thinking about it though, the same character traits I would consider manly, I also respect in women. (character traits only) I don't really want to rescue the princess that's been waiting in the tower dreaming of her prince charming. Those chicks are expensive.

I think people should simply act how they feel is natural and men and women can find a partner who suits them in the meantime.
If a woman (or man) wants a dude who hunts bares with his bear hands (see what I did there?) then find him.
If a man (or woman) wants a lady who's completely submissive and loves cooking, cleaning, and whatever other social standards are/were present, then find her.
Of course, that's considering that people will actually be true to themselves. To that I say, yeah, probably not going to happen. But it's a good thought.

I think Popeye summed it up best: I is what I is..(hmmm was that Popeye?

The roles are all very subjective today. Maybe they always were but social convention prevented the conversation. I do wonder though, if one of the things that gets in the way of meeting the "right" person is our own belief that we have to fit into one of these roles, or perhaps that someone else has to fit into that mold. I'm thinking that most of us have no real clue what we want, but we sort of discover it when that mythical right person shows up. And similarly, we don't know who we want to be until there's someone (or something I suppose) who gives us a reason to be that person.

The old saying of "I wish I were the person my dog thinks I am" sort of comes to mind. There are some enormous flaws in this logic I'm sure, and I'm not suggesting someone can or should change who they are for someone else. But is it such a bad thing ( or non masculine or whatever) to want to live up to how someone else sees you?

But is it such a bad thing ( or non masculine or whatever) to want to live up to how someone else sees you?

So much wrong with this statement. Well it's not a bad thing initially but it's the very reason why I haven't had much success with relationships. One of the most important relationships that I had and lost...make that two...was because neither could be honest with me by just being themselves. One of them was trying to impress me and the other didn't want to disappoint me I guess. Too this day I'm still hurting and hoping for that person that can just be themselves with me.

I also recently got asked out by a friend who I really care about and I was super excited to be asked out on a romantic date by him and then he killed it by confessing his unrequited affections for me and not thinking I would say yes because of me being such an "amazing person" and him just being a joe schmo. That sentence alone put an enormous amount of pressure on me in the sense that he already had a specific idea of how I was.

Anyway my definition of a man is being who you are, being comfortable with that, and being honest with others about it.

I understand and 99% of the time I agree with you because even as I was typing I realized how it would sound. And I totally get the pressure of being pedastialized as well. I wish I had the eloquence or intelligence to explain my thought more thoroughly as I wasn't suggesting that selling one's self out was the goal. While there are some thoughts floating in my brain I could offer to illustrate it, don't think I can.

I think your definition would be an attractive and pretty desirable trait regardless of gender. I suppose there could be quibbling about being who you are, I mean if someone is a miserable person that would seem bad. But hey, if that's who they are go with it, no reason to pretend they aren't.

Just because I'm thinking of it though, here's something that could be rhetorical but I'm genuinely curious of thoughts on it. Is the difference between our own perceptions of ourselves, and how other's see us a concern, or should self confidence make it irrelevant? Along those lines, when we look at ourselves, do we really see who we are, or do we see ourselves as how we hope people see us, or maybe who we wish we are? Okay, I'm overly fascinated with this. Should stay in the football thread where i belong.

Perception is a good point. But it all boils down to actions. It doesn't really matter how one is perceived as long as their actions are consistent with their goals.
That's why it's important to be honest in a relationship, or even before a potential relationship starts. If one is dishonest with others, and perhaps even themselves, their future actions will ring true what their actual goals are. Hence my statement above actions are a byproduct of goals.
People can change, but one shouldn't be living life considering what they or others might become, but by who they and others are now. Then once they find someone with whom they can share goals and experiences and an open and honest relationship, they can grow and change together with no surprises in between.

I think 'being a man' or the old concept of it is gone. Now its marketers and magazines telling you what being a man is.

That's part of the problem. Men are obsolete. There's no hunting. No head of household. Not even any rites of passage. How is it possible to be a guy nowadays and not feel like you're completely irrelevant?

An maybe that is why I just dont get it. I dont get the overall man thing.
I work a job that is considered 'manly'. Ive seen and done some shit that will probably put me in therapy at some point. Maybe because being at a firehouse is one of the last bastions of an old culture where men where 'men'. I work with all guys, we talk about guy things, we get to break a lot of shit and play with fire. Its damn near primative.
I have many friends who work in cubicles, commute for hours on end and they are the ones who always want to do things like 'man vacations' or have a 'man cave'. Really its so for a night or two a year they can act a fool before returning to the doldrums of their every day routines.
I cant blame them. While I groan at the magazines or TV networks that tell men how to be 'men', my friends who buy into this have no other outlet anymore.

I think I'm mistating the "change" element and I'm not sure I have a better or clear way to express it without excessive mushiness or more ambiguity. I'll try again when I have a better command of the English language. I agree with most of what you and Jaz have said, understanding that a central part of that is that each of us has things that matter to us personally. I of course agree the honesty and openness part should be a given expectation. That's why I find the "game" element ridiculous. I suppose it's fun for those that play some, just doesn't interest me, and I'm not very good at it. Cause and effect could go either direction.

Ultimately, find someone you like, for whatever the reasons, and if they like you for their reasons I really think that all the rules and things we think of intellectually fall by the wayside. Not counting some of the deal breakers of course. Yes, we need some moral compasses no question. But outside of that, and given the open/honest stuff when there is a connection you find that there are a lot of things you like that you never considered before(or maybe it's just me). Maybe put this way, on paper a lot of people may look like they'd never be a match. Sometimes, based on correct star alignment, the paper is worthless. Not always, probably rarely. But every once in awhile.

Important Disclaimer: Although this is Chuck Palahniuk’s official website, we are in essence, more an official ‘fansite.’ Chuck Palahniuk himself does not own nor run this website. Nor did he create it. It was started by Dennis Widmyer, who is the webmaster and editor of most of the content. Chuck Palahniuk himself should not be held accountable nor liable for any of the content posted on this website. The opinions expressed in the news updates, content pages and message boards are not the opinions of Chuck Palahniuk nor his publishers. If you are trying to contact Chuck Palahniuk, sending emails to this website will not get you there. You should instead, take the more professional route of contacting his publicist at Doubleday.